Soccer Topics: No goalies in the USA

58,588 Views | 1035 Replies | Last: 4 hrs ago by cal83dls79
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
This Messi dude is pretty good.
Cal88
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cal88
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Video of the slap and kick above:
Cal88
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Norway-Senegal a very good game, two good teams going at it, Norway making Senegal pay for their mistakes.

Senegal on the brink, after facing the two heavyweights in the group of death, they need at the very least a narrow loss to hope getting through, assuming they beat Iraq.
Cal88
How long do you want to ignore this user?

Big C
How long do you want to ignore this user?

"Casuals" like me love the way the big scorers are delivering!
sluggo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Big C said:


"Casuals" like me love the way the big scorers are delivering!

It is amazing that it looks like another Messi versus Mbappe World Cup. The Mbappe part is sort of expected, but Messi as his age is unique.

In Spain's last game Lamine Yamal looked like he was playing at 100%. I am used to him cruising at 85% and still smoking fools. But at 100% he is terrifying. I can't wait to watch more. (I don't like Spain's lineup with Rodrigo (Rodri) and Predri redundant with Predri the much better player, I hope their coach comes around to that midfield being run off the field against top teams.)

I missed Norway against Senegal due to travel but I saw Norway's first game and Haaland was at peak level.

Overall, I was worried that many players would not be at full strength due to the long European season and the heat, but that has not been a problem so far. The 48-team tournament is too long so we will see.
dajo9
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I do not consider myself a soccer fan but I do consider myself a fan of the World Cup. They should bring the number of teams back down to 32. Day after day I look at the lineup of games and I am just disinterested. There are way too many uncompetitive games. When does the USA play again?
Censorship has always been a tool of the fascist
concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cal88 said:

Norway-Senegal a very good game, two good teams going at it, Norway making Senegal pay for their mistakes.

Senegal on the brink, after facing the two heavyweights in the group of death, they need at the very least a narrow loss to hope getting through, assuming they beat Iraq.

But, someone said Group D was the most difficult.
concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Big C said:


"Casuals" like me love the way the big scorers are delivering!

Reading this makes my day, which is just starting. Thank you.
ducktilldeath
How long do you want to ignore this user?
concordtom said:

Cal88 said:

Norway-Senegal a very good game, two good teams going at it, Norway making Senegal pay for their mistakes.

Senegal on the brink, after facing the two heavyweights in the group of death, they need at the very least a narrow loss to hope getting through, assuming they beat Iraq.

But, someone said Group D was the most difficult.

Nobody said that.
concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
dajo9 said:

I do not consider myself a soccer fan but I do consider myself a fan of the World Cup. They should bring the number of teams back down to 32. Day after day I look at the lineup of games and I am just disinterested. There are way too many uncompetitive games. When does the USA play again?

I feel (and what do I know) that this is the best World Cup of all time, by multiple metrics.

I bet they go with multiple country hosts again as the norm and that the tournament expands to 64 as the norm.
concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ducktilldeath said:

concordtom said:

Cal88 said:

Norway-Senegal a very good game, two good teams going at it, Norway making Senegal pay for their mistakes.

Senegal on the brink, after facing the two heavyweights in the group of death, they need at the very least a narrow loss to hope getting through, assuming they beat Iraq.

But, someone said Group D was the most difficult.

Nobody said that.

Oh really?
What did "someone" say about that?
concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cal88 said:

On the plus side, you have nice side stories like Curacao, Bosnia and DR Congo who wouldn't have qualified otherwise. The other positive is that these tuneup games allow teams to gel and start the knockout rounds in a better shape, look at the USMNT. On the negative side, you have 20-30 games that are fillers.

So far deep into matchday 2 we have these breakdowns of the field:

The class of the tournament, at least 2 of these will be in the semis, depending on whether they meet earlier or not:
France, Argentina, Spain

Dangerous teams:
Morocco, England, Germany, Holland, Japan

Potential spoilers:
Norway, Belgium, Cote d'Ivoire; USA and Canada playing at home with big momentum, both top players Pulisic and Davies will be healthy in the bracket games.

Team Senegal is in disarray, problems with organisation and players not getting paid, otherwise would have been on top of the spoilers category.



And now there's the Cape Verde two ties to be considered!!
Can they advance?
concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
smh said:

ducktilldeath said:

smh said:

dajo9 said:

> Damn Canadians

me and my better half drove up to canada several times, twice to reconnect with our transplanted draft dodging UCSD college buddy, many weeks just driving around /day hikes, bucchardt (spelling sucks) gardens included, vast open space and mtns # ohh canada # trump free zone # good times / long gone

You drove to an island? Mad props!
edit: I'm aware that you can get to said island without leaving your car lol

some of this some of that, waayback in the rear view mirror
# ferries rock # life sentence stuck at home bear # bought several fetching sheep skins

Sometimes it's good to just appreciate the ride, right?
There doesn't need to be anything more.
concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ducktilldeath said:

concordtom said:

Cal88 said:

On the plus side, you have nice side stories like Curacao, Bosnia and DR Congo who wouldn't have qualified otherwise. The other positive is that these tuneup games allow teams to gel and start the knockout rounds in a better shape, look at the USMNT. On the negative side, you have 20-30 games that are fillers.




There's talk that the tournament will soon expand to 64 teams.

That would see 16 groups of 4 with the top 2 moving on the elimination stage of final 32 teams and 2 getting dropped after the first 3 group games.

I think it's great and I totally agree with your point about teams warning up and gelling.

64 is better than 48 for competitive reasons. The fact they created a system where 1/3 of the group winners have to face a runner up and the other 2/3 do not is asinine. The difference between a 2nd place group finisher and 3rd is frequently enormous. One could argue that the competition itself will be watered down at 64(it would be), but at least there isn't an inherent unfairness to the system. The randomness of the group selection process is one thing, but baking in a massive disadvantage for GROUP WINNERS is NCAA/FIA/IOC levels of stupidity.


I totally agree with you except for the group selection process, which seems fair - except for the advantage that hosts get. But, that seems like a fair enough advantage we can not only accept but embrace. It's more fun when the host(s) live on!
concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
dajo9 said:

There were complaints that the U.S. didn't have enough practice fields for 48 teams. When they go to 64 teams I guess the host will be Europe. Or Asia. It will become about what country hosts the final rounds.

Yes, the financials for this tournament, and I haven't looked into anything yet, are going to cause a new structure.
concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BearlySane88 said:



Fun!!
concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Big C said:

ducktilldeath said:

concordtom said:

Cal88 said:

On the plus side, you have nice side stories like Curacao, Bosnia and DR Congo who wouldn't have qualified otherwise. The other positive is that these tuneup games allow teams to gel and start the knockout rounds in a better shape, look at the USMNT. On the negative side, you have 20-30 games that are fillers.




There's talk that the tournament will soon expand to 64 teams.

That would see 16 groups of 4 with the top 2 moving on the elimination stage of final 32 teams and 2 getting dropped after the first 3 group games.

I think it's great and I totally agree with your point about teams warning up and gelling.

64 is better than 48 for competitive reasons. The fact they created a system where 1/3 of the group winners have to face a runner up and the other 2/3 do not is asinine. The difference between a 2nd place group finisher and 3rd is frequently enormous. One could argue that the competition itself will be watered down at 64(it would be), but at least there isn't an inherent unfairness to the system. The randomness of the group selection process is one thing, but baking in a massive disadvantage for GROUP WINNERS is NCAA/FIA/IOC levels of stupidity.

How about if they put every country in and establish the tradition of always having the opening game be between Italy and Vatican City, with an accompanying giant world-wide pool for the game's goal differential?

gotta think outside the box on this...

Alternatively, have the opener be between the US and Greenland, winner gets to annex the other country. Okay, some stick-in-the-mud will say that Greenland is not its own country. Whatever, Denmark needs to help make this work.

Every team already IS in the tournament!
It's called qualifying, World Cup Qualifiers. Happens on every continent years and months before the World Cup Finals, which is this tournament.

It all ends with the Final of the Finals.
concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sycasey said:

Big C said:

Okay, some stick-in-the-mud will say that Greenland is not its own country.

FIFA has plenty of member "nations" that are actually territories of another country! Scotland and Wales, for example. Curacao is in this tournament and is a Dutch territory.

We can make it happen for Greenland.

Only problem is,
Greenland doesn't have any fifa qualifying fields.



Cal88
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Pro-regime change Iranian expats harassing and attacking Iranian fans.








Regime change supporters rooting against Iran:


BearlySane88
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Didn't you ask earlier in the thread to not make this political?
dajo9
How long do you want to ignore this user?
concordtom said:

Big C said:

ducktilldeath said:

concordtom said:

Cal88 said:

On the plus side, you have nice side stories like Curacao, Bosnia and DR Congo who wouldn't have qualified otherwise. The other positive is that these tuneup games allow teams to gel and start the knockout rounds in a better shape, look at the USMNT. On the negative side, you have 20-30 games that are fillers.




There's talk that the tournament will soon expand to 64 teams.

That would see 16 groups of 4 with the top 2 moving on the elimination stage of final 32 teams and 2 getting dropped after the first 3 group games.

I think it's great and I totally agree with your point about teams warning up and gelling.

64 is better than 48 for competitive reasons. The fact they created a system where 1/3 of the group winners have to face a runner up and the other 2/3 do not is asinine. The difference between a 2nd place group finisher and 3rd is frequently enormous. One could argue that the competition itself will be watered down at 64(it would be), but at least there isn't an inherent unfairness to the system. The randomness of the group selection process is one thing, but baking in a massive disadvantage for GROUP WINNERS is NCAA/FIA/IOC levels of stupidity.

How about if they put every country in and establish the tradition of always having the opening game be between Italy and Vatican City, with an accompanying giant world-wide pool for the game's goal differential?

gotta think outside the box on this...

Alternatively, have the opener be between the US and Greenland, winner gets to annex the other country. Okay, some stick-in-the-mud will say that Greenland is not its own country. Whatever, Denmark needs to help make this work.

Every team already IS in the tournament!
It's called qualifying, World Cup Qualifiers. Happens on every continent years and months before the World Cup Finals, which is this tournament.

It all ends with the Final of the Finals.

With 64 teams the real qualifiers will be when FIFA decides how many teams each continent gets. More bribes, please.
Censorship has always been a tool of the fascist
concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I do not understand which Iranian factions exist nor what they want, but can you succinctly state your position of right and wrong in Ukraine and Iran, tossing in a little Venezuela if you like.

I'm glad Trumpism hasn't reared its head in this WC. That could have become a huge deal.
concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
dajo9 said:

concordtom said:

Big C said:

ducktilldeath said:

concordtom said:

Cal88 said:

On the plus side, you have nice side stories like Curacao, Bosnia and DR Congo who wouldn't have qualified otherwise. The other positive is that these tuneup games allow teams to gel and start the knockout rounds in a better shape, look at the USMNT. On the negative side, you have 20-30 games that are fillers.




There's talk that the tournament will soon expand to 64 teams.

That would see 16 groups of 4 with the top 2 moving on the elimination stage of final 32 teams and 2 getting dropped after the first 3 group games.

I think it's great and I totally agree with your point about teams warning up and gelling.

64 is better than 48 for competitive reasons. The fact they created a system where 1/3 of the group winners have to face a runner up and the other 2/3 do not is asinine. The difference between a 2nd place group finisher and 3rd is frequently enormous. One could argue that the competition itself will be watered down at 64(it would be), but at least there isn't an inherent unfairness to the system. The randomness of the group selection process is one thing, but baking in a massive disadvantage for GROUP WINNERS is NCAA/FIA/IOC levels of stupidity.

How about if they put every country in and establish the tradition of always having the opening game be between Italy and Vatican City, with an accompanying giant world-wide pool for the game's goal differential?

gotta think outside the box on this...

Alternatively, have the opener be between the US and Greenland, winner gets to annex the other country. Okay, some stick-in-the-mud will say that Greenland is not its own country. Whatever, Denmark needs to help make this work.

Every team already IS in the tournament!
It's called qualifying, World Cup Qualifiers. Happens on every continent years and months before the World Cup Finals, which is this tournament.

It all ends with the Final of the Finals.

With 64 teams the real qualifiers will be when FIFA decides how many teams each continent gets. More bribes, please.

Best thing about expansion is that you get 3 games to warm up. Then it's a 32 team single elimination tournament.

The problem will remain that who moves on is arbitrary in soccer. A PK make or miss decider is not appealing to me. Neither is a ball kicked into someone's arm in the box, or a foul-or-no-foul (?) trip, which is in either case is accessorized by adding a belly flop of pain followed by 3 somersaults and a rush of protest to the ref by both teams.
concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
dajo9 said:

concordtom said:

Big C said:

ducktilldeath said:

concordtom said:

Cal88 said:

On the plus side, you have nice side stories like Curacao, Bosnia and DR Congo who wouldn't have qualified otherwise. The other positive is that these tuneup games allow teams to gel and start the knockout rounds in a better shape, look at the USMNT. On the negative side, you have 20-30 games that are fillers.




There's talk that the tournament will soon expand to 64 teams.

That would see 16 groups of 4 with the top 2 moving on the elimination stage of final 32 teams and 2 getting dropped after the first 3 group games.

I think it's great and I totally agree with your point about teams warning up and gelling.

64 is better than 48 for competitive reasons. The fact they created a system where 1/3 of the group winners have to face a runner up and the other 2/3 do not is asinine. The difference between a 2nd place group finisher and 3rd is frequently enormous. One could argue that the competition itself will be watered down at 64(it would be), but at least there isn't an inherent unfairness to the system. The randomness of the group selection process is one thing, but baking in a massive disadvantage for GROUP WINNERS is NCAA/FIA/IOC levels of stupidity.

How about if they put every country in and establish the tradition of always having the opening game be between Italy and Vatican City, with an accompanying giant world-wide pool for the game's goal differential?

gotta think outside the box on this...

Alternatively, have the opener be between the US and Greenland, winner gets to annex the other country. Okay, some stick-in-the-mud will say that Greenland is not its own country. Whatever, Denmark needs to help make this work.

Every team already IS in the tournament!
It's called qualifying, World Cup Qualifiers. Happens on every continent years and months before the World Cup Finals, which is this tournament.

It all ends with the Final of the Finals.

With 64 teams the real qualifiers will be when FIFA decides how many teams each continent gets. More bribes, please.


Enough get in, there's a formula for calculating who. I'm good with that.
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cal88 said:

Pro-regime change Iranian expats harassing and attacking Iranian fans.








Regime change supporters rooting against Iran:




I don't think they should be harassing fans in the street but I've got no problem with cheering against the Iranian regime.
concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
https://www.yahoo.com/sports/soccer/article/world-cup-2026-which-third-place-team-will-the-united-states-play-in-the-round-of-32-230920481.html

This is a discussion of who USA plays next. There are links to analysis by various sites as to who we will get as our next knockout opponent.

This bbc link will update the knockout bracket as we go along in completing group stages:

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/world-cup/schedule#KnockoutStage

Currently it shows USA playing Algeria and then the winner of Egypt vs Czech.
The winner of that pod of 4 plays the winner of Congo/Ghana and Spain/Austria.

Our path goes through
Levi's in San Jose (Algeria?)
Lumen in Seattle (Egypt?)
Sofi in LA (Spain?)
Dallas
New Jersey


I would think this is a very favorable setup for USA. But depending on results, it could all switch up, except for the stadiums and dates.
Anarchistbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Iranian fans at these games are not from Iran, so an intramural feud. I visited with some Iranian fans in a bar Sunday vs Belgium , all were rooting for Iran and not the regime. Hardly monarchists.
concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I think when an Argentinian coach of the USA is rooting for USA he is NOT rooting for Trump and MAGA.

When most people root for Iran they are rooting for Persian people and culture and language and history that goes back thousands of years.

And that's what makes the WC and the Olympics a good thing.
smh
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sycasey said:

.. .. .. I don't think they should be harassing fans in the street but I've got no problem with cheering against the Iranian regime.

good advice, tanks S
sighned, not dead yet # funk trunk; i.c.e. too
Cal88
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Live brackets based on standings before today's games, very favorable to the USMNT, and super favorable to Argentina:

https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11095/13556636/world-cup-2026-bracket-and-knockout-fixtures-whos-facing-who-in-the-last-32-and-route-to-final

https://worldcupbracket.xyz/
Cal88
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sycasey said:

Cal88 said:

Pro-regime change Iranian expats harassing and attacking Iranian fans.








Regime change supporters rooting against Iran:




I don't think they should be harassing fans in the street but I've got no problem with cheering against the Iranian regime.


These pro-Pahlavi fans in the bottom link were actually cheering against the Iran team...
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cal88 said:

sycasey said:

Cal88 said:

Pro-regime change Iranian expats harassing and attacking Iranian fans.








Regime change supporters rooting against Iran:




I don't think they should be harassing fans in the street but I've got no problem with cheering against the Iranian regime.


These pro-Pahlavi fans in the bottom link were actually cheering against the Iran team...

And? They can cheer against a sports team if they like, so what?
PAC-10-BEAR
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Messi and MBappe were both amazing yesterday, especially Messi, except for his missed penalty.

It's still hard to believe they played on the same team and never won Champions League.
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.